DOCSLIB.ORG

Trending Decisions Cases We Are Following

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Trending Decisions Cases We Are Following Trending Decisions Cases we are following By Natasha MacParland and Robert Nicholls The following is a table of current cases of inter- est to the Canadian insolvency community as prepared by Natasha MacParland and Robert Nicholls of Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP INSOLVENCY CASES UNDER APPEAL CASE SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ISSUES STATUS OF APPEAL Canada v. Canada Do “super priority” charges granted in a Compa- The Court of Appeal of Alberta, on August 29, 2019, North Group Inc. nies’ Creditors Arrangement Act initial order (in- confirmed the power of the Court to grant charges (Alberta) cluding debtor in possession and administrative pursuant to the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act charges) have priority over a statutory deemed in favour of interim lenders, restructuring professionals trust for unremitted source deductions? and directors with such charges having priority over the company’s assets ahead of the deemed trust claims of the Crown arising from the Income Tax Act, the Canada Pen- sion Plan and the Employment Insurance Act. Leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada was granted on March 26, 2020. The hearing was held on December 1, 2020. The decision was reserved and has yet to be released. The Insolvency Institute of Canada and the Canadian Association of Insolvency and Restructuring Profession- als are interveners in this matter. Callidus Capital Can a debtor whose sole remaining asset is a The Supreme Court of Canada heard the appeal on Corporation v. 9354- litigation claim seek court approval to obtain January 23, 2020. On the same day, in a unanimous 9186 Quebec Inc. litigation financing to pursue the litigation, or decision, the Supreme Court of Canada allowed the [Bluberi Gaming does such course of action itself constitute a appeal, overturning the decision of the Court of Ap- Technologies Inc.] plan which should be submitted to and subject peal of Quebec. (Quebec) to the vote of creditors? Written reasons were released on May 8, 2020. The Can a court bar a creditor from voting on a plan Supreme Court of Canada held that pursuant to sec- of arrangement? tion 11 of the CCAA, the supervising judge in CCAA proceedings has broad discretionary authority that will only be interfered with if the supervising judge erred in principle or exercised their discretion unreasonably. As a result of the broad discretion granted to the super- vising judge, he or she has jurisdiction to: • bar a creditor from voting on a plan of arrange- ment if that creditor is acting for an improper purpose (in this case, a secured creditor attempting to strategically value its security to acquire control over the outcome of the vote on the plan of ar- rangement was held to be an improper purpose); and 18 Rebuilding Success SPRING / SUMMER 2021 F3_TRENDING_DECISIONS.indd 18 2021-02-09 3:06 PM TRENDING DECISIONS CASE SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ISSUES STATUS OF APPEAL (continued from previous • to approve third party litigation funding as page) interim financing in insolvency proceedings. Such litigation financings do not, by definition, constitute a plan of arrangement (the Supreme Court of Canada did not find that the specific financing agreement in this case constituted a plan). As of December 22, 2020, while this case has been cited on numerous occasions in relation to the discretion to be afforded to supervising judges, the above-noted creditor voting principle has received favourable judicial commentary on one occasion and the other principle has yet to receive judicial commentary. The Insolvency Institute of Canada and the Cana- dian Association of Insolvency and Restructuring Professionals were interveners in this matter. Third Eye Capital Cor- Whether gross overriding royalties (“GORs”) at- The Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta held that poration v B.E.S.T. Ac- taching to mining claims are interests in land or the GORs held by B.E.S.T. were security interests in tive 365 Fund, B.E.S.T. security interests? land and that knowledge of another secured party’s Total Return Fund Inc. Whether knowledge is irrelevant to a determina- pre-existing security interest is irrelevant to a deter- and Tier One Capital tion of priority under section 95 of the Mines and mination of priority under the Mines and Minerals Limited Partnership and Minerals Act? Act. ACCEL Energy Canada Leave to appeal the trial level decision was heard on Limited and ACCEL April 16, 2020 and the Court of Appeal of Alberta Canada Holdings released its decision on leave on April 27, 2020. Limited In its decision, the Court of Appeal of Alberta (i) (Alberta) denied leave to appeal with respect to the first issue, confirming that GORs attaching to mining claims are interests in land; and (ii) granted leave to appeal with respect to the second issue. Notice of Appeal was filed on May 1, 2020. The date for the appeal of the substantive issues has not been set. Canada v. Toronto- Is a secured creditor required to reimburse payments The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal Dominion Bank made to it by a borrower who failed to remit GST on April 29, 2020, confirming that a secured credi- (Federal/Quebec) source deductions, or do the deemed trust provisions tor is required to reimburse payments made to it require a “triggering event”; i.e. bankruptcy of the by a borrower who failed to remit sales tax source debtor, realization of security or requirement to pay? deductions, under the sales tax deemed trust provi- sions. A “triggering event” is not required. Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada was filed on June 29, 2020. Responding materials were filed on August 28, 2020. The Canadian Bankers’ Association was an inter- vener in this matter at the Federal Court of Appeal. United Food and Com- Is a receiver a successor employer and required to The judicial review hearing took place on Novem- mercial Workers Inter- respond to a notice to bargain? ber 18, 2019. The decision was reserved and has yet national Union, Local to be released. 175 v. Rose of Sharon (Ontario) Community (Ontario) VOLUME 21 ISSUE 1 Rebuilding Success 19 F3_TRENDING_DECISIONS.indd 19 2021-02-09 3:06 PM TRENDING DECISIONS CASE SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ISSUES STATUS OF APPEAL PricewaterhouseCoopers Can a trustee in bankruptcy, in reliance on the The Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta, on August Inc., as trustee in transfer at undervalue provisions of the BIA 15, 2019, found that PwC, as trustee, could pursue bankruptcy of Sequoia unwind an oil and gas transfer between related its claim as against Perpetual Energy Inc., but dis- Resources Corp. v. companies? missed PwC’s claim against the CEO of Perpetual Perpetual Energy Inc., Can a bankruptcy trustee void a transaction on Energy Inc. et al. (Alberta) grounds of public policy and statutory illegality? In a decision released on September 24, 2020, the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta granted costs in favour of the CEO at 85%. The trustee in bank- ruptcy was directly liable for such cost award. Notice of appeal of the decision to allow PwC to pursue its claim against Perpetual Energy Inc. was filed by Perpetual Energy Inc. as of right to the Court of Appeal of Alberta on August 23, 2019. The hearing was held on December 10, 2020. There have been multiple ancillary decisions re- leased in these proceedings, but as of December 22, 2020, a decision on the substantive issues has yet to be released. Capital Steel Inc v Is a provision in a construction contract which On January 29, 2019, the Court of Appeal of Chandos Construction imposes monetary consequences on a subcontrac- Alberta reversed a chambers decision, finding the Ltd (Alberta) tor’s insolvency enforceable in bankruptcy? provision unenforceable in bankruptcy, as it acts to deprive creditors of value otherwise available to them and effectively directs value to an unsecured creditor. On October 2, 2020, in an eight-to-one deci- sion, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, confirming the decision of the Court of Appeal of Alberta. The Insolvency Institute of Canada and the Cana- dian Association of Insolvency and Restructuring Professionals were interveners in this matter. 7636156 Canada Inc. v How much may a landlord draw down on a letter The Ontario Superior Court of Justice held that a land- OMERS Realty of credit provided by the bankrupt as security for lord may only draw down on a letter of credit in an Corporation (Ontario) the bankrupt’s obligations under a lease? amount equal to three months’ accelerated rent follow- ing disclaimer of the lease by a trustee in bankruptcy. Notice of appeal was filed with the Court of Appeal for Ontario on November 1, 2019. 1732427 Ontario Inc. v Is a pre-authorized debit payment paid to a supplier The Court of Appeal for Ontario allowed the ap- 1787930 Ontario Inc. after a debtor has filed a notice of intention to file peal on December 3, 2019, finding that the motion (Ontario) a proposal under the BIA an exercise of a credi- judge erred in not considering whether the pay- tor’s remedy and thus prohibited by the statutorily ment was related to a bona fide agreement with a mandated stay of proceedings? key supplier to pay past debts, which are permitted payments under the BIA. The Court of Appeal for Ontario sent the case back down to the motion judge to make a finding of fact on this issue. As of December 22, 2020, no decision has been released on the substantive issues, as returned to the motion 20 Rebuilding Success SPRING / SUMMER 2021 F3_TRENDING_DECISIONS.indd 20 2021-02-09 3:06 PM TRENDING DECISIONS CASE SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ISSUES STATUS OF APPEAL Re Media5 Corporation What is the scope of section 243(1) of the Bank- The Court of Appeal of Quebec allowed the ap- and Acquisitions Essagal ruptcy and Insolvency Act (the provision allowing peal in part on July 20, 2020, confirming that the Inc.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Challenge & Change
    Canada’s Justice Development Goals: 2020 challenge & change change challenge & This report was prepared by CALIBRATE. Design by Francesca Oprandi calibratesolutions.ca fraoprandi.com The JDGs JDG 1 P. 11 JDG 2 P. 15 JDG 3 P. 20 Address everyday Meet Make courts legal problems legal needs work better 1.1 Educate early 2.1 Focus on legal needs for 3.1 Ensure access to courts 1.2 Prevent everyone 3.2 Promote multi service centres 2.2 1.3 Offer a continuum of services Encourage innovation 3.3 Help people who are 2.3 1.4 Reflect Canadian society Expand scope of legal aid representing themselves 2.4 Focus on access to justice 3.4 Manage cases effectively 3.5 Be accessible and user-focused 3.6 Protect judicial independence JDG 4 P. 23 JDG 5 P. 27 JDG 6 P. 30 Improve Work Build family justice together capability 4.1 Offer a broad range of services 5.1 Establish coordinated efforts 6.1 Educate law students and 4.2 Promote consensual resolution 5.2 Include everyone legal professionals 6.2 4.3 Innovate 5.3 Be bold; Take action Expand justice education in schools 4.4 Restructure family courts 5.4 Work within institutions 5.5 Coordinate across Canada JDG 7 P. 33 JDG 8 P. 36 JDG 9 P. 42 Analyze Improve funding Innovate and learn strategies 7.1 Keep track of what is working 8.1 Develop metrics 9.1 Coordinate to spend 7.2 Share good ideas 8.2 Work with researchers in money well all fields 9.2 Better fund legal aid 9.3 Make sure the money lasts A Message from the Chair 2020 was an extraordinary year.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2019 | Court of Appeal for British Columbia I | Page
    ANNUAL REPORT Court of Appeal for British Columbia 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS 01 MESSAGE FROM CHIEF JUSTICE BAUMAN 03 REGISTRAR’S REPORT 07 STATISTICS 22 PLANNING, PRIORITIES, AND ACCESS TO JUSTICE COMMITTEE 28 RULES AND PRACTICE COMMITTEE 31 TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE 35 EDUCATION COMMITTEE 37 JOINT COURTS TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE 38 JUDICIAL ACCESS COMMITTEE 40 LAW CLERK COMMITTEE 41 LIBRARY COMMITTEE 42 MEMBERS OF THE COURT OF APPEAL 45 CHANGES TO THE COURT’S COMPLEMENT 53 STAFF OF THE COURT OF APPEAL 56 APPENDIX 1 - CIVIL STATISTICS 2007 – 2019 57 APPENDIX 2 - CRIMINAL STATISTICS 2007 – 2019 58 APPENDIX 3 - COMBINED STATISTICS 2007 – 2019 Annual Report 2019 | Court of Appeal for British Columbia i | Page MESSAGE FROM CHIEF JUSTICE BAUMAN The only constant in life is change, but courts are steeped in tradition. What is the value of ceremony, solemnity, advocacy, and independence when the legal problems British Columbians face are increasingly complex and the cost of legal services is already out of reach for many? Does tradition simply serve as an unhelpful anchor, preventing the court from navigating the seas of change? My answer is no. Rather than weighing the court down, these guiding principles, judicial independence being first among them, promote institutional resilience and allow the court to adapt to changing circumstances. At this point in our history, courts are grappling with questions of policy related to changes in social In a free and norms, new technology, demands for data transparency, and threats to privacy. Do courts need to democratic society, the respond to these changing conditions? Absolutely. In fact, courts and the advocates who work in them tradition of judicial must take a leadership role in mapping the way forward.
    [Show full text]
  • Thesis Submitted in Conformity with the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Laws (LL.M) Graduate Department of the Faculty of Law University of Toronto
    “The Life of a Reserve”: How Might We Improve the Structure, Content, Accessibility, Length & Timeliness of Judicial Decisions? by Jon Khan A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Laws (LL.M) Graduate Department of the Faculty of Law University of Toronto © Copyright by Jon Khan (2019) “The Life of a Reserve”: How Might We Improve the Structure, Content, Accessibility, Length & Timeliness of Judicial Decisions? Jon Khan Masters of Law Faculty of Law University of Toronto 2019 Abstract This thesis explains how judicial decisions may impact access to justice and how might we make decisions a better source of data while also making them more timely, concise, accessible, and consistent. It examines the historical and theoretical underpinnings of Canadian decisions and the relationship of decision-writing to decision-making. It then discusses the results of an original empirical study of the evolution of British Columbia trial decisions over the last forty years and a survey of Canadian courts. It argues that the current process for writing and issuing Canadian judicial decisions likely does not further the goals of access to justice and may even hinder them. To improve access to justice, it suggests that governments, academics, and judiciaries should rely on human-centered design to design standardized structures and templates for decisions, and it provides a design plan for such reforms and examines the ways judicial independence may impact such reforms. ii Acknowledgments To my advisor—Professor Andrew Green—I would have been rudderless without your direction. Thank you for motivating me to continually think about why judges do what they do and to persistently explore my intuitions about the law and what data can reveal.
    [Show full text]
  • Citation: R. V. Lange, 2015 YKTC 43 Date: 20151127 Docket: 14-00138 Registry: Whitehorse
    Citation: R. v. Lange, 2015 YKTC 43 Date: 20151127 Docket: 14-00138 Registry: Whitehorse IN THE TERRITORIAL COURT OF YUKON Before His Honour Judge Luther REGINA v. MARK LEWIS LANGE Appearances: Noel Sinclair Counsel for the Crown Gordon R. Coffin* Counsel for the Defence REASONS FOR JUDGMENT [1] LUTHER T.C.J. (Oral): This case is not about the system failing Mark Lange; rather, it is about how Mark Lange failed himself. [2] The Crown has fulfilled all the statutory requirements to proceed with the dangerous offender application. Volumes have already been written about this offender by psychiatrists, psychologists, other health professionals, probation officers, corrections personnel, teachers, social workers, and others. We have the benefit of an excellent Gladue report from Mr. Mark Stevens. *Mr. Coffin was counsel of record throughout the proceedings but was discharged by Mr. Lange on the day of judgment. At the request of the Court, Mr. Coffin graciously remained as the judgment was read. R. v. Lange, 2015 YKTC 43 Page 2 [3] From pages three to five of that report, Mark Stevens talks about the early upbringing of Mr. Lange in some considerable detail. Life Circumstances Mark Lewis Lange was born on 3 September 1975 at the Whitehorse General Hospital. His mother is M.H. Both Mark and his mother are citizens of the Na-Cho Nyack Dun First Nation in Mayo. Mark has no idea who his father is, and his mother either won’t tell him or doesn’t know. “Me and my mother, we don’t talk—we don’t even like each other,” says Mark.
    [Show full text]
  • COURT of APPEAL of YUKON Citation: the First Nation of Nacho Nyak Dun V
    COURT OF APPEAL OF YUKON Citation: The First Nation of Nacho Nyak Dun v. Yukon, 2015 YKCA 18 Date: 20151104 Docket: 14-YU752 Between: The First Nation of Nacho Nyak Dun, The Tr’ondëk Hwëch’in, Yukon Chapter- Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, Yukon Conservation Society, Gill Cracknell, Karen Baltgailis, The Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation Respondents (Plaintiffs) And Government of Yukon Appellant (Defendant) And The Gwich’in Tribal Council Intervenor Before: The Honourable Chief Justice Bauman The Honourable Madam Justice Smith The Honourable Mr. Justice Goepel On appeal from: An order of the Supreme Court of Yukon, dated December 2, 2014 (The First Nation of Nacho Nyak Dun v. Yukon (Government of), 2014 YKSC 69, Whitehorse Docket 13-A0142). Counsel for the Appellant: J.B. Laskin, J. Terry, J. Roth, M. Radke Counsel for the Respondents: T.R. Berger, Q.C., M.D. Rosling, C.P.S. Riley Counsel for the Intervenor: J. Langlois Place and Date of Hearing: Whitehorse, Yukon August 20, 21, 2015 Place and Date of Judgment: Vancouver, British Columbia November 4, 2015 Written Reasons by: The Honourable Chief Justice Bauman Concurred in by: The Honourable Madam Justice Smith The Honourable Mr. Justice Goepel The First Nation of Nacho Nyak Dun v. Yukon Page 2 Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 4 II. FACTS ............................................................................................................ 4 Umbrella Final Agreement .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of British Columbia
    ` Annual Report 2019 Supreme Court of British Columbia www.bccourts.ca TABLE OF CONTENTS REPORT OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE ASSOCIATE CHIEF JUSTICE .......................... 1 JURISDICTION OF THE COURT ....................................................................... 13 CHANGES TO THE COURT’S COMPLEMENT ...................................................... 16 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE .............................................................................. 24 CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE .............................................................................. 25 CRIMINAL LAW COMMITTEE ........................................................................ 26 EDUCATION COMMITTEE ............................................................................ 28 FAMILY LAW COMMITTEE ........................................................................... 30 JOINT COURTS TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE ....................................................... 32 JUDICIAL ACCESS POLICY WORKING COMMITTEE .............................................. 33 LAW CLERKS COMMITTEE ........................................................................... 35 LIBRARY COMMITTEE ................................................................................. 37 PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE ....................................................................... 38 JUDGES OF THE SUPREME COURT .................................................................. 40 MASTERS OF THE SUPREME COURT ............................................................... 49 REGISTRARS
    [Show full text]
  • Loi Sur Les Juges
    CANADA CONSOLIDATION CODIFICATION Judges Act Loi sur les juges R.S.C., 1985, c. J-1 L.R.C. (1985), ch. J-1 Current to September 11, 2021 À jour au 11 septembre 2021 Last amended on June 29, 2021 Dernière modification le 29 juin 2021 Published by the Minister of Justice at the following address: Publié par le ministre de la Justice à l’adresse suivante : http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca http://lois-laws.justice.gc.ca OFFICIAL STATUS CARACTÈRE OFFICIEL OF CONSOLIDATIONS DES CODIFICATIONS Subsections 31(1) and (2) of the Legislation Revision and Les paragraphes 31(1) et (2) de la Loi sur la révision et la Consolidation Act, in force on June 1, 2009, provide as codification des textes législatifs, en vigueur le 1er juin follows: 2009, prévoient ce qui suit : Published consolidation is evidence Codifications comme élément de preuve 31 (1) Every copy of a consolidated statute or consolidated 31 (1) Tout exemplaire d'une loi codifiée ou d'un règlement regulation published by the Minister under this Act in either codifié, publié par le ministre en vertu de la présente loi sur print or electronic form is evidence of that statute or regula- support papier ou sur support électronique, fait foi de cette tion and of its contents and every copy purporting to be pub- loi ou de ce règlement et de son contenu. Tout exemplaire lished by the Minister is deemed to be so published, unless donné comme publié par le ministre est réputé avoir été ainsi the contrary is shown. publié, sauf preuve contraire.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2019
    ` Annual Report 2019 Supreme Court of British Columbia www.bccourts.ca TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................... I REPORT OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE ASSOCIATE CHIEF JUSTICE .......................... 1 JURISDICTION OF THE COURT ....................................................................... 13 CHANGES TO THE COURT’S COMPLEMENT ...................................................... 16 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE .............................................................................. 24 CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE .............................................................................. 25 CRIMINAL LAW COMMITTEE ........................................................................ 26 EDUCATION COMMITTEE ............................................................................ 28 FAMILY LAW COMMITTEE ........................................................................... 30 JOINT COURTS TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE ....................................................... 32 JUDICIAL ACCESS POLICY WORKING COMMITTEE .............................................. 33 LAW CLERKS COMMITTEE ........................................................................... 35 LIBRARY COMMITTEE ................................................................................. 37 PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE ....................................................................... 38 JUDGES OF THE SUPREME COURT .................................................................. 40 MASTERS
    [Show full text]
  • Yukon Supreme Court Kaska Decision (2019)
    SUPREME COURT OF YUKON Citation: Kaska Dena Council v. Yukon (Government of), Date: 20190305 2019 YKSC 13 S.C. No. 16-A0161 Registry: Whitehorse BETWEEN KASKA DENA COUNCIL Plaintiff/ Defendant by Counterclaim AND GOVERNMENT OF YUKON Defendant/ Intervenor by Counterclaim AND CHIEF GEORGE MORGAN on his own behalf and on behalf of all the members of the Liard First Nation, and LIARD FIRST NATION Defendants/ Plaintiffs by Counterclaim AND ACHO DENE KOE FIRST NATION Intervenor Before Chief Justice R.S. Veale Appearances: Claire E. Anderson Counsel for Kaska Dena Council Elaine Cairns and Marlaine Anderson-Lindsay Counsel for the Government of Yukon Caily DiPuma and Gavin Gardiner Counsel for Liard First Nation Hana Boye Counsel for Acho Dene Koe First Nation REASONS FOR JUDGMENT Kaska Dena Council v. Yukon (Government of Yukon), 2019 YKSC 13 Page 2 INTRODUCTION [1] Kaska Dena Council (“KDC”) applies for a declaration and order that the Government of Yukon (“Yukon”) has a duty to consult and accommodate KDC prior to issuing sport hunting licences and tags under the Wildlife Act, R.S.Y. 2002, c. 229, in the southern part of Kaska territory in Yukon. KDC also applies for a declaration that Yukon has breached its duty to consult. At the outset, it is important to understand that KDC seeks a declaration that the duty to consult and accommodate arises prior to issuing sport hunting licences and tags on an annual basis under the Wildlife Act and Regulations. Yukon states that it is consulting and is ready to continue. KDC submits that Yukon refuses to discuss the preliminary strength of claim issue.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2017
    Annual Report 2017 Supreme Court of British Columbia www.courts.gov.bc.ca TABLE OF CONTENTS REPORT OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE ASSOCIATE CHIEF JUSTICE ............................ 1 JURISDICTION OF THE COURT .......................................................................... 11 CHANGES IN THE COURT’S COMPLEMENT .......................................................... 14 CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE ................................................................................. 25 CRIMINAL LAW COMMITTEE ........................................................................... 27 EDUCATION COMMITTEE ............................................................................... 29 FAMILY LAW COMMITTEE .............................................................................. 31 LAW CLERKS COMMITTEE .............................................................................. 33 JOINT COURTS TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE .......................................................... 35 LIBRARY COMMITTEE .................................................................................... 36 JUDICIAL ACCESS POLICY WORKING GROUP ....................................................... 37 JUDGES OF THE SUPREME COURT ..................................................................... 39 MASTERS OF THE SUPREME COURT .................................................................. 48 REGISTRARS OF THE SUPREME COURT ............................................................... 49 JUDICIAL STAFF ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Court of Appeal of Yukon
    COURT OF APPEAL OF YUKON Citation: Senft v. Vigneau, 2020 YKCA 8 Date: 20200327 Docket: 18-YU840 Between: Angela R. Senft and Michael E. Senft Respondents (Plaintiffs) And Audrey Vigneau and Susan Herrmann Appellants (Defendants) Corrected Judgment: The text of the judgment was corrected on the cover page and at paragraphs 40, 45, 46, 54, 57, 61, 68, 91, 96, and 105 on April 2, 2020. Before: The Honourable Madam Justice D. Smith The Honourable Mr. Justice Harris The Honourable Madam Justice K. Shaner On appeal from: An order of the Supreme Court of Yukon, dated February 13, 2019, (Senft v. Vigneau, Whitehorse Docket 17-A0120). Counsel for the Appellants: D.F. Sutherland, Q.C. M. Hannam Counsel for the Respondents: G. Whittle M. Whittle Place and Date of Hearing: Whitehorse, Yukon November 13, 2019 Place and Date of Judgment: Vancouver, British Columbia March 27, 2020 Written Reasons by: The Honourable Madam Justice D. Smith Concurred in by: The Honourable Mr. Justice Harris The Honourable Madam Justice K. Shaner Senft v. Vigneau Page 2 Summary: The respondents brought an action against the appellants for allegedly defamatory comments. The appellants pleaded the defence of fair comment and the respondents replied by pleading the appellants had acted with express malice in publishing the comments. The judge put the question of malice to the jury without first determining if the evidence established a probability of malice. The jury was directed to first make a finding on the question of malice before considering if the defence of fair comment was established. The jury found the comments were defamatory and that the appellants had acted with malice.
    [Show full text]
  • Organizations Reflected in This Report Access to Justice Is a Longstanding Priority of Many Organizations Across the Country
    Organizations Reflected in this Report Access to justice is a longstanding priority of many organizations across the country. The new initiatives and progress in 2020 highlighted in this report are on top on the longstanding, ongoing work of legal clinics, ministries of justice, legal aid lawyers, courts and non-profits. Law Societies and association across the country continue to prioritize access to justice in their daily operations. In compiling this report, The Action Committee received information about 2020 projects from the organizations listed below (in the language each submitted). To add your organization’s work next year, sign up for the Action Committee’s A2J newsletter at www.justicedevelopmentgoals.ca / www.objectifsdelaccèsàlajustice.ca National Organizations Canadian Bar Association Justice Sector Constellation Canadian Forum on Civil Justice / Forum canadien sur la Law Foundation Alberta justice civile Law Society of Alberta Justice Canada LawNow- Alberta LEAF : FAEJ Pro Bono Alberta Pro Bono Students Canada Resolution and Court Administration Services, Alberta Social Security Tribunal of Canada Justice and Solicitor General British Columbia Northwest Territories Access Pro Bono BC Court of Appeal for the Northwest Territories Access to Justice BC Law Foundation of NWT BC Court of Appeal Northwest Territories Department of Justice BC Family Justice Innovation Lab Outreach Legal Aid Clinic, Legal Aid Commission of the BC First Nations Justice Council Northwest Territories Better Justice Lab Supreme Court of the Northwest
    [Show full text]